Discussion: Adding New Tribes to All Servers / General Game-balance

  • Add Huns & Egyptians as "standard" on all new servers


    I favor the immediate addition of Egyptians and Huns to all new servers. I do not think it is fair to players who commit to 230-350 day long servers to have to wait until their next, next server to use them. I say this with the assumption the tribes will be rolled out universally at some point. Not doing so would likely foster more frustration and anger in the community. I do understand the decision to utilize them only on "specials" currently, i.e the Birthday Special that ran in Sept and the "New Years Special" that started last month. Doing so increases the amount of players on those servers, increasing the competitiveness etc. which should result in greater gold expenditure ("revenue"). It can also be seen as an additional opportunity to test the new tribes in a WW setting. (Though given the fact the Beta server was not used properly by the Devs, I have doubts as to how much such a thing factored into the decision making process)


    However I also recognize that there are concerns about the balance of the new tribes on their own, within the context of WW servers and of the general tribal balance when all 5 are present. Below are some thoughts on addressing tribal balance.


    Here are some figures I pulled for tribe distribution, comparing NYS servers to other active (and relatively full) servers within the same domains. I got them from Getter so I don't have info on Hun and Egyptian %, since the tables currently don't reflect the new tribes.


    Note: Since I started drafting this post, Travian has released overall NYS stats from across the domains.



    The Data


    To better address the question of game balance I've begun an analysis of the tribes, looking at different things from Attack Power, Effective Defense, Raiding etc. I am by no means done nor is it all necessarily original. I have seen various threads address different aspects that I am looking at, but I think my work is a bit more comprehensive. I hope that it aids in the discussion. Since I lack an organized draft, let alone a final draft, I will keep things as simple as possible, opting for highlights of the data. (usually through graphs) Since the work is incomplete I will note that everything I say in relation to the data is part of a "working thesis". It could be entirely wrong, but based on the information I have now, these are my thoughts.


    Since its incomplete I'm also missing a lot of categories for data that I haven't gotten to yet, nor have I had a chance to find real world data to compare to "textbook" data. But I think its important that this discussion start sooner, rather then later.





    Egyptians



    Offensive & Raiding Hierarchy



    Other Things

    Here are some other general balancing issues and ideas that come to mind that don't fit in the above sections.

    • Merge Gaul Cranny & Trapper - This could be more useful for inexperienced players to defend themselves and protect resources. I think it makes the trapper a bit more valuable than it otherwise is by reducing the number of building slots used.

    Tribe / Unit related things I haven't gotten to yet but will at some point. These include data stuff, as well as sections of the post that I don't have the energy for at the moment.

    • Defense Comparison

      • Discussion of Tribe Infantry / WW Defense
      • Cavalry Defense Analysis - Comparing speed, effective defense, training cost, upkeep
      • General Defense Analysis - How do the tribes stack up defensively?
    • Additional Raiding Analysis - Evaluating raiding potential i.e estimation of daily raid income based on different attributes like average farm field distance, unit speed, units trained per day etc.
    • Overall Analysis - How do the tribes unit combinations compare based on different play-styles and "overall". Considering all information, raiding, defense, offense, cost, upkeep etc.
    • Real World vs Theoretical Hammer AP Ratios - Compile battle reports to compare real world hammer use to the theoretical standard.

      • Use to offer additional insight into defense value comparisons

    I feel like there should be more but this is all that is coming to mind that falls within Tribe specific game attributes. If anyone has anything else please offer them up.


    Summary


    It is important to remember that these are simply options. They do not constitute anything that must be done but they may help address various community concerns. The addition of the tribes across all servers is the thing that I absolutely 100% support.




    __________________________________________________________________________________________________________
    Note: This post has been added to all English language domains. I will try my best to respond in all threads, but depending on the depth and quantity of the responses this may prove difficult to keep up with.


    What I have written here is in part a derivation of work I began 10 months ago with a simple list. The list asked a basic question, how can Travian be improved. Over time this list has grown to become a project devoted to proposing and advocating for things to improve the game. Right now I call it the "Veteran Legends Project". I hope soon to have a dedicated thread on the subject but the project is rooted in the same concept as my original list and the sentiment that I have expressed above. I am looking for people to help with this project, I have be accumulating a list of community leader names who may have both the ability and willingness to aid the project. That list likely won't be enough as the project is ultimately a reflection of the community's answer: "How can Travian be improved?". More voices and more hands will improve the efficiency and value of the project. I also understand that this game is something we do for fun and this project involves a bit of work. I also understand that game communities worldwide have done things above and beyond for their games, regardless of the cost in time or money.


    If you are interested in learning more, or aiding the project in some way, please send me a PM. I'll be happy to chat.

  • Egyptians are way too overpowered in my opinion, adding them to all new servers would be a terrible mistake.


    Which knowing travian, means it will happens with immediate effect

    On the basis of what? If its solely on the basis of the waterworks I've offered two possible solutions.


    • Reduce total bonus to 50% - Cuts the bonus in half. Still offering an advantage as a unique building but reducing the overall impact.
    • Eliminate waterworks - Replace w/ Unique Building similar to Horse Watering Pool - Except instead of reducing the crop consumption of horses, it reduces the crop consumption of infantry.(preferred suggestion)

      • Lvl 10 = 1/2 Crop Consumption of Slaves, Lvl 15 = 1/2 Crop Consumption of Ash Warden, Lvl 20 = 1/2 Crop Consumption of Kopesh
      • 3/4 Crop may also be acceptable (this would be preferrable I think)

    Otherwise they have the weakest offense, very high offensive training costs, defense is comparable to Gauls (Ash Warden are like an inverted Phalanx). Slaves are a bit OP given the shear number you can muster, but I've also offered a solution to that.


    Simply coming to say they are overpowered without offering any sort of solution isn't exactly productive.


    OP Update #1:


    My original data had the wrong number of trained units per day. The AP graph has been updated to reflect the actual values. I also changed it to give the lvl 20 smithy AP values. Marksman builds were also added. I also included the HWP/HDT, which significantly increased Roman AP. I have not gotten to updating all of the offensive graphs yet. Hopefully in the next day or two.


    I've since withdrawn my suggestion for Mercs, eliminated the change to EI AP and adjusted the EC AP suggestion to 185. While they don't need it, I think they deserve to have the #1 Offensive Unit / Cavalry. (Technically with smithy upgrades they do but I think the base value should still be highest)

  • Well, it will still be a bad idea, just hold them on different servers, alot will quit if they get all 5 tribes on all servers :P

    There is an irony to that. For years players clamored for new tribes, then you get them and people are against them. I get they aren't perfect but dang its the biggest game change since region/victory point servers were introduced. It is something and it shows effort on the part of TG to add to/improve the game.

  • There is an irony to that. For years players clamored for new tribes, then you get them and people are against them. I get they aren't perfect but dang its the biggest game change since region/victory point servers were introduced. It is something and it shows effort on the part of TG to add to/improve the game.

    It's just too little too late though. Why should we need to complain for years before we see a change? It's a backwards mentality.

  • Eliminate waterworks - Replace w/ Unique Building similar to Horse Watering Pool - Except instead of reducing the crop consumption of horses, it reduces the crop consumption of infantry.(preferred suggestion)

    Uh yeah, no. Lowering waterworks effect maybe, but this isn't a special building then. Just a lame ripoff from an existing one. :D And with a small diet artefact you'd have infantry that consumes 0.25 crop... which is even more OP than the waterworks. :D


    adjusted the EC AP suggestion to 185

    Please NO. With HDF the EC is already a class of its own, no need to buff it anymore. Roman cavalry is the last thing to get buffed. And Huns being a very aggressive tribe should have a strong unit as well. So 180 form EC and Merc, the Marauder deserves such AP.

    just hold them on different servers

    Agreed, separate servers like 28 & 29 we use now are perfectly fine. I'd keep it just as it is.

  • There is an irony to that. For years players clamored for new tribes, then you get them and people are against them. I get they aren't perfect but dang its the biggest game change since region/victory point servers were introduced. It is something and it shows effort on the part of TG to add to/improve the game.

    Ive never asked for new tribes, i was just fine with the 3 alredy here, and i know alot others feel the same way. :)

  • The servers with the new tribes can always be implemented like Speed servers were. 1 server per region/country. And then we could run that for a few rounds. They need balancing for sure, but its nothing that cant be fixed. The idea behind the tribes is refreshing, they just need some work. I wouldnt get rid of the 3-tribe servers completly, I can see the 5-tribe and 3-tribe servers running side by side.

  • I like change,
    But far less players playing travian.
    Does sound a good idea, But sometimes too many changes sometimes.
    Hopefully im wrong.
    I just like playing one server at a time.

  • It's always interesting to see BlackBlade's suggestions and I can't help but agree with them.

    Yes, I've built my fair share of WWs. Won a few, lost a few. Played far too many rounds for far too long. Made a lot friends and enemies.


    Yes, I've played as an anvil and as a hammer. I'm only playing now because of all the friendship I have built over the past ten years. I love Travian but I love the community even more.


    Envy me for I have everything, Fear me for I have nothing to lose.